I think I need to explain that I was NOT talking specifically about Facebook. I'm not a participant in that and have no idea what the rules and regulations are there (if any).

I do, however, participate in another site that is explicitly for showing your own pictures and viewing other people's. On that site, unless you mark your photos for creative commons (which has its own set of rules and may or may not require permission from the photographer), all photos are copyrighted and it says so clearly right there on the page. In addition, some of the photographers add another additional notice of copyrighut either directly on the picture or right underneath it, or they use watermarks.

YET .... there have been many instances of people stealing photos from that site, applying the photos to t-shirts, coffee mugs, etc. and selling those items for profit of course and without permission from the photographer. Some people are even copying and enlarging the pictures and selling them as artwork under their own name.

Obviously if you're putting pictures on Facebook of your own children and making them available to your friends and family members in hopes that they will like them enough to copy them for their own 'scrapbooks', that's a whole different situation.

But if there's any question at all as to whether or not the person who took the picture wants it shared further than his/her original post, I think it would be polite at the very least to ask if it's okay to copy and repost the picture somewhere else and to make sure the actual photographer is at least credited.

I agree with this. Further, if you're talking about an artist who uses his or her Facebook page to promote that art, you need to get permission to use his or her photos of artwork.

I feel like I live in a different world than a lot of you. Everyone I know shares other people's photos all the time on Facebook, and none of us care.

In fact, I almost expect people to take my photos sometimes. Multiple relatives get photos of my children that way, they save and print them from my facebook page, and I see them later framed in their homes. I shared them for the actual purpose of sharing them, so why would that bother me? And if they want to re-post them on their wall saying "look at my cute nephew" or whatever, I expect that to happen on Facebook. It's a medium I use for that purpose, to share photos of my kids for other family to enjoy. It has never occurred to me to need credit for taking the photo in question. I just don't relate to this.

That's what the "share" button is for. It allows FB users to share other people's photos while still showing who the original photographer was/is. I like using the share button. It's a lot easier than downloading and then uploading the same picture again.

I don't think the "share" button is actually that well understood by the average Facebook user. I know several people who thought that by using the "share" button, the picture would only been seen by mutual friends, and not by the "sharer's" entire friend list. "But if I do that, then Grandma won't be able to see it, since Muriel has her blocked," etc.

I don't understand what kind of 'credit' you wanted? Glowing compliments? Did you even have permission to post pictures of her daughters on FB?

I see nothing wrong with what the mom did. You tagged them thereby giving them permission to use the pictures. Unless you are a professional photographer who took professional photos and didn't get paid, I don't think you have much complaint.

I don't understand what kind of 'credit' you wanted? Glowing compliments? Did you even have permission to post pictures of her daughters on FB?

I see nothing wrong with what the mom did. You tagged them thereby giving them permission to use the pictures. Unless you are a professional photographer who took professional photos and didn't get paid, I don't think you have much complaint.

tagging is not giving permission to use the pictures. She doesn't have to be a "professional" to get credit for taking the picture.

I don't understand what kind of 'credit' you wanted? Glowing compliments? Did you even have permission to post pictures of her daughters on FB?

I see nothing wrong with what the mom did. You tagged them thereby giving them permission to use the pictures. Unless you are a professional photographer who took professional photos and didn't get paid, I don't think you have much complaint.

I am wondering if the photographers in the his thread would be upset if someone took a picture that they had posted on Facebook, printed it out and displayed it in their home, or mailed it to relatives or used it as a Christmas card. Credit is stripped in that case as well. Would that be considered the same thing?

I don't understand what kind of 'credit' you wanted? Glowing compliments? Did you even have permission to post pictures of her daughters on FB?

I see nothing wrong with what the mom did. You tagged them thereby giving them permission to use the pictures. Unless you are a professional photographer who took professional photos and didn't get paid, I don't think you have much complaint.

tagging is not giving permission to use the pictures. She doesn't have to be a "professional" to get credit for taking the picture.

Tagging is not sharing? I disagree. Once you post a picture on FB, its really difficult to control how people use it. The mom used a pic, that she was tagged on, as her cover photo. I see nothing wrong with it.

What kind of credit did OP want? Money? Recognition? Seems a little self involved if she's annoyed simply because she didn't get any praise for a good picture. Someone out there posted "good picture." That's praise. Why isn't that enough?

I don't understand what kind of 'credit' you wanted? Glowing compliments? Did you even have permission to post pictures of her daughters on FB?

I see nothing wrong with what the mom did. You tagged them thereby giving them permission to use the pictures. Unless you are a professional photographer who took professional photos and didn't get paid, I don't think you have much complaint.

tagging is not giving permission to use the pictures. She doesn't have to be a "professional" to get credit for taking the picture.

Tagging is not sharing? I disagree. Once you post a picture on FB, its really difficult to control how people use it. The mom used a pic, that she was tagged on, as her cover photo. I see nothing wrong with it.

What kind of credit did OP want? Money? Recognition? Seems a little self involved if she's annoyed simply because she didn't get any praise for a good picture. Someone out there posted "good picture." That's praise. Why isn't that enough?

I don't think the photographer was looking for praise, just the recognition that SHE took the picture.

Yes, someone posted the words "good picture" on it on the other woman's page. What a golden opportunity for the reposting person to acknowledge that and say, " I agree it's a great picture. Soandso took it."

Instead, by saying nothing, she implied that she took the picture herself and therefore credit for the picture (and the compliment) belonged to HER. It was one of those 'lies by omission' that are not looked upon kindly by serious photographers whether they're amateur or professional. It's dishonest.

I don't understand what kind of 'credit' you wanted? Glowing compliments? Did you even have permission to post pictures of her daughters on FB?

I see nothing wrong with what the mom did. You tagged them thereby giving them permission to use the pictures. Unless you are a professional photographer who took professional photos and didn't get paid, I don't think you have much complaint.

tagging is not giving permission to use the pictures. She doesn't have to be a "professional" to get credit for taking the picture.

Tagging is not sharing? I disagree. Once you post a picture on FB, its really difficult to control how people use it. The mom used a pic, that she was tagged on, as her cover photo. I see nothing wrong with it.

What kind of credit did OP want? Money? Recognition? Seems a little self involved if she's annoyed simply because she didn't get any praise for a good picture. Someone out there posted "good picture." That's praise. Why isn't that enough?

Because it's a legal thing, not a social thing. That is why I didn't get into it any further. I'm objecting to the idea that because you post something online and let people know about it, you are automatically giving up control of that picture. That's not true. Tagging someone in a photo does not give someone the "right" to use that photo in any manner that they chose. You (general) may not care about how your photos are used when you upload them to a website, however, that doesn't mean that someone has the "right" to use them in any way they want to.

OP has already said that she doesn't want to go through the hassle of contacting people to ask them to give her credit, nor does she want to watermark them. However, because of this, she can't expect people to automatically know that she wants credit for taking the pictures that they are sharing with others.

Also, just because I don't post any pictures without a watermark doesn't mean that I think people who do are wrong. I am fully aware of the fact that most people assume that anything they see online is free to use in any way that they want or that there is no need to give credit. I also know that there are a lot of people who are happy to share their pictures with friends, family, and acquaintances without any thought of credit or legalities. But if more people were aware of the fact that you should attribute credit to pictures you share, maybe the OP wouldn't have posted.

I don't think the photographer was looking for praise, just the recognition that SHE took the picture.

Yes, someone posted the words "good picture" on it on the other woman's page. What a golden opportunity for the reposting person to acknowledge that and say, " I agree it's a great picture. Soandso took it."

Instead, by saying nothing, she implied that she took the picture herself and therefore credit for the picture (and the compliment) belonged to HER. It was one of those 'lies by omission' that are not looked upon kindly by serious photographers whether they're amateur or professional. It's dishonest.

I totally agree. On the rare occasions I've shared someone else's picture on acebook, I always write 'thanks to Jane Doe for taking and sharing!'. It's a case of simple being honest (that I didn't take it) and doing the right thing (giving credit where credit is due).

I also belong to an online site devoted to a particular topic. When we post videos/picture that other people have taken the number one rule is that we MUST cite/credit the source.

Tagging someone in a photo does not give someone the "right" to use that photo in any manner that they chose. You (general) may not care about how your photos are used when you upload them to a website, however, that doesn't mean that someone has the "right" to use them in any way they want to.

I think your best bet is to put "Photo by..." on each photo as a watermark.

I really don't think anyone did anything wrong here. If you put a photo where others can see it, as long as they aren't selling it, they can do what they like with it unless you've specified otherwise. If you don't want your photos used by others, don't post them on your Facebook, or anywhere on the internet. It's the reality we live in nowadays.

I don't understand what kind of 'credit' you wanted? Glowing compliments? Did you even have permission to post pictures of her daughters on FB?

I see nothing wrong with what the mom did. You tagged them thereby giving them permission to use the pictures. Unless you are a professional photographer who took professional photos and didn't get paid, I don't think you have much complaint.

tagging is not giving permission to use the pictures. She doesn't have to be a "professional" to get credit for taking the picture.

Tagging is not sharing? I disagree. Once you post a picture on FB, its really difficult to control how people use it. The mom used a pic, that she was tagged on, as her cover photo. I see nothing wrong with it.

What kind of credit did OP want? Money? Recognition? Seems a little self involved if she's annoyed simply because she didn't get any praise for a good picture. Someone out there posted "good picture." That's praise. Why isn't that enough?

Instead, by saying nothing, she implied that she took the picture herself and therefore credit for the picture (and the compliment) belonged to HER. It was one of those 'lies by omission' that are not looked upon kindly by serious photographers whether they're amateur or professional. It's dishonest.

I completely disagree with this. When I post pictures that I took, I don't imply that I did. When others post pictures that I took, they don't imply that they did. Unless you're using Facebook differently than everybody I know, nobody implies anything.

Instead, by saying nothing, she implied that she took the picture herself and therefore credit for the picture (and the compliment) belonged to HER. It was one of those 'lies by omission' that are not looked upon kindly by serious photographers whether they're amateur or professional. It's dishonest.

You know it depends on what the compliment was of really. If it was of the photograph itself, in an artist sense - great lighting, framing, timing, etc ok the compliment does belong to the photographer, something like "wow, great shot!" But if the compliment was about the subject of the photo - that the person looked beautiful, or "congrats on the winning dunk!" or whatever - the compliment doesn't belong necessarily to the photographer. The intellectual rights might be a legal thing, but a compliment is subjective.